226 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16085233)
1. Categorizing breast mammographic density: intra- and interobserver reproducibility of BI-RADS density categories.
Ciatto S; Houssami N; Apruzzese A; Bassetti E; Brancato B; Carozzi F; Catarzi S; Lamberini MP; Marcelli G; Pellizzoni R; Pesce B; Risso G; Russo F; Scorsolini A
Breast; 2005 Aug; 14(4):269-75. PubMed ID: 16085233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Reader variability in reporting breast imaging according to BI-RADS assessment categories (the Florence experience).
Ciatto S; Houssami N; Apruzzese A; Bassetti E; Brancato B; Carozzi F; Catarzi S; Lamberini MP; Marcelli G; Pellizzoni R; Pesce B; Risso G; Russo F; Scorsolini A
Breast; 2006 Feb; 15(1):44-51. PubMed ID: 16076556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Inter- and intraradiologist variability in the BI-RADS assessment and breast density categories for screening mammograms.
Redondo A; Comas M; Macià F; Ferrer F; Murta-Nascimento C; Maristany MT; Molins E; Sala M; Castells X
Br J Radiol; 2012 Nov; 85(1019):1465-70. PubMed ID: 22993385
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Breast imaging reporting and data system standardized mammography lexicon: observer variability in lesion description.
Baker JA; Kornguth PJ; Floyd CE
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1996 Apr; 166(4):773-8. PubMed ID: 8610547
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Interobserver and intraobserver variability in determining breast density according to the fifth edition of the BI-RADS® Atlas.
Pesce K; Tajerian M; Chico MJ; Swiecicki MP; Boietti B; Frangella MJ; Benitez S
Radiologia (Engl Ed); 2020; 62(6):481-486. PubMed ID: 32493654
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Mammographic density estimation: comparison among BI-RADS categories, a semi-automated software and a fully automated one.
Tagliafico A; Tagliafico G; Tosto S; Chiesa F; Martinoli C; Derchi LE; Calabrese M
Breast; 2009 Feb; 18(1):35-40. PubMed ID: 19010678
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Inter-observer agreement according to three methods of evaluating mammographic density and parenchymal pattern in a case control study: impact on relative risk of breast cancer.
Winkel RR; von Euler-Chelpin M; Nielsen M; Diao P; Nielsen MB; Uldall WY; Vejborg I
BMC Cancer; 2015 Apr; 15():274. PubMed ID: 25884160
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Interobserver agreement in breast radiological density attribution according to BI-RADS quantitative classification.
Bernardi D; Pellegrini M; Di Michele S; Tuttobene P; Fantò C; Valentini M; Gentilini M; Ciatto S
Radiol Med; 2012 Jun; 117(4):519-28. PubMed ID: 22228132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Accuracy of assigned BI-RADS breast density category definitions.
Nicholson BT; LoRusso AP; Smolkin M; Bovbjerg VE; Petroni GR; Harvey JA
Acad Radiol; 2006 Sep; 13(9):1143-9. PubMed ID: 16935726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A dedicated BI-RADS training programme: effect on the inter-observer variation among screening radiologists.
Timmers JM; van Doorne-Nagtegaal HJ; Verbeek AL; den Heeten GJ; Broeders MJ
Eur J Radiol; 2012 Sep; 81(9):2184-8. PubMed ID: 21899969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Evaluation of mammographic density patterns: reproducibility and concordance among scales.
Garrido-Estepa M; Ruiz-Perales F; Miranda J; Ascunce N; González-Román I; Sánchez-Contador C; Santamariña C; Moreo P; Vidal C; Peris M; Moreno MP; Váquez-Carrete JA; Collado-García F; Casanova F; Ederra M; Salas D; Pollán M;
BMC Cancer; 2010 Sep; 10():485. PubMed ID: 20836850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Potential Use of American College of Radiology BI-RADS Mammography Atlas for Reporting and Assessing Lesions Detected on Dedicated Breast CT Imaging: Preliminary Study.
Jung HK; Kuzmiak CM; Kim KW; Choi NM; Kim HJ; Langman EL; Yoon S; Steen D; Zeng D; Gao F
Acad Radiol; 2017 Nov; 24(11):1395-1401. PubMed ID: 28728854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Misclassification of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Mammographic Density and Implications for Breast Density Reporting Legislation.
Gard CC; Aiello Bowles EJ; Miglioretti DL; Taplin SH; Rutter CM
Breast J; 2015; 21(5):481-9. PubMed ID: 26133090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Mammographic density measured with quantitative computer-aided method: comparison with radiologists' estimates and BI-RADS categories.
Martin KE; Helvie MA; Zhou C; Roubidoux MA; Bailey JE; Paramagul C; Blane CE; Klein KA; Sonnad SS; Chan HP
Radiology; 2006 Sep; 240(3):656-65. PubMed ID: 16857974
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Classification of fatty and dense breast parenchyma: comparison of automatic volumetric density measurement and radiologists' classification and their inter-observer variation.
Østerås BH; Martinsen AC; Brandal SH; Chaudhry KN; Eben E; Haakenaasen U; Falk RS; Skaane P
Acta Radiol; 2016 Oct; 57(10):1178-85. PubMed ID: 26792823
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Assessment of Interradiologist Agreement Regarding Mammographic Breast Density Classification Using the Fifth Edition of the BI-RADS Atlas.
Ekpo EU; Ujong UP; Mello-Thoms C; McEntee MF
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 May; 206(5):1119-23. PubMed ID: 26999655
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. BI-RADS lexicon for US and mammography: interobserver variability and positive predictive value.
Lazarus E; Mainiero MB; Schepps B; Koelliker SL; Livingston LS
Radiology; 2006 May; 239(2):385-91. PubMed ID: 16569780
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Effects of Changes in BI-RADS Density Assessment Guidelines (Fourth Versus Fifth Edition) on Breast Density Assessment: Intra- and Interreader Agreements and Density Distribution.
Irshad A; Leddy R; Ackerman S; Cluver A; Pavic D; Abid A; Lewis MC
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Dec; 207(6):1366-1371. PubMed ID: 27656766
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of Visual Assessment of Breast Density in BI-RADS 4th and 5th Editions With Automated Volumetric Measurement.
Youk JH; Kim SJ; Son EJ; Gweon HM; Kim JA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Sep; 209(3):703-708. PubMed ID: 28657850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Inter-reader Variability in the Use of BI-RADS Descriptors for Suspicious Findings on Diagnostic Mammography: A Multi-institution Study of 10 Academic Radiologists.
Lee AY; Wisner DJ; Aminololama-Shakeri S; Arasu VA; Feig SA; Hargreaves J; Ojeda-Fournier H; Bassett LW; Wells CJ; De Guzman J; Flowers CI; Campbell JE; Elson SL; Retallack H; Joe BN
Acad Radiol; 2017 Jan; 24(1):60-66. PubMed ID: 27793579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
